Re: [Help] How to use "iostat" or other command to monitor Software RAID I/O ????
On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 11:18, axacheng wrote: > Hello lists : > > Does anyone knows , How to monitor Software RAID disk I/O > > i have a Software RAID5 device named "/dev/md0" , i've tried to use > "iostat" to monitor /dev/md0 I/O status ... /proc/partitions does not have any counts for software RAID, so you can't monitor the RAID itself. It does have counts for the block devices that comprise a software RAID so it would not be THAT difficult to write an iostat type program that can read /proc/mdstat to determine which devices comprise a software RAID and then monitors their stats in /proc/partitions and uses some addition to determine the total for the software RAID device. The CPU overhead of incrementing counters is negligible, there's no reason why the counts for software RAID could not be displayed in /proc/partitions, I think that this is a minor bug in the software RAID code. If someone posts a patch to fix it to the linux-kernel list then it should have some chance of being accepted. -- http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/postal/Postal SMTP/POP benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page
sane trouble-ticket systems
Hi all. I'm searching for a trouble-ticket system that doesn't suck. Currently we're using RT, and IMHO it sucks. What I want is something *quiet*. What I want doesn't break threaded mail reading the way RT does. What I want leaves the headers of a message intact, rather than sending a whole new message, with the original headers pulled out and stuck in the body. I've talked to a coworker about this, and what we decided would be *really* nice is a trouble ticket system that works on the same principle as mutt's mail threading features. That way, the TT system can be completely transparent, especially to the end-user (i.e. no need to put a ticket number in the mail subject). Even in cases where the end-user's MUA doesn't support the In-Reply-To header, mutt can still make intelligent decisions based on the message subject. I think a good TT system could work in a similar way. Does such a system exist? What other TT systems are worth investigating? It doesn't need to be as heavy as RT, which I think is overkill for our 10 person service organization with roughly 800 users. (Though I think the service organization will be growing, I still think RT is heavier than it needs to be.) Thanks. noah pgpu0ErVg9Jso.pgp Description: PGP signature
[Help] How to use "iostat" or other command to monitor Software RAID I/O ????
Hello lists : Does anyone knows , How to monitor Software RAID disk I/O i have a Software RAID5 device named "/dev/md0" , i've tried to use "iostat" to monitor /dev/md0 I/O status ... But, it's seems doesn't work !!! === fileserver:/etc/rc.boot# iostat -x /dev/md0 Linux 2.4.20-xfs (fileserver) 07/10/03 avg-cpu: %user %nice%sys %idle 1.18 0.01 1.05 97.76 Device:rrqm/s wrqm/s r/s w/s rsec/s wsec/srkB/swkB/s avgrq-sz avgqu-sz await svctm %util === i've tried to use "mdadm"also, but same as "iostat" result (no more I/O output!!!) Does anyone knows , How to monitor Software RAID disk I/O Thanks. -- Trust & Unique ... axacheng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Re: [Help] How to use "iostat" or other command to monitor Software RAID I/O ????
On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 11:18, axacheng wrote: > Hello lists : > > Does anyone knows , How to monitor Software RAID disk I/O > > i have a Software RAID5 device named "/dev/md0" , i've tried to use > "iostat" to monitor /dev/md0 I/O status ... /proc/partitions does not have any counts for software RAID, so you can't monitor the RAID itself. It does have counts for the block devices that comprise a software RAID so it would not be THAT difficult to write an iostat type program that can read /proc/mdstat to determine which devices comprise a software RAID and then monitors their stats in /proc/partitions and uses some addition to determine the total for the software RAID device. The CPU overhead of incrementing counters is negligible, there's no reason why the counts for software RAID could not be displayed in /proc/partitions, I think that this is a minor bug in the software RAID code. If someone posts a patch to fix it to the linux-kernel list then it should have some chance of being accepted. -- http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/postal/Postal SMTP/POP benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
sane trouble-ticket systems
Hi all. I'm searching for a trouble-ticket system that doesn't suck. Currently we're using RT, and IMHO it sucks. What I want is something *quiet*. What I want doesn't break threaded mail reading the way RT does. What I want leaves the headers of a message intact, rather than sending a whole new message, with the original headers pulled out and stuck in the body. I've talked to a coworker about this, and what we decided would be *really* nice is a trouble ticket system that works on the same principle as mutt's mail threading features. That way, the TT system can be completely transparent, especially to the end-user (i.e. no need to put a ticket number in the mail subject). Even in cases where the end-user's MUA doesn't support the In-Reply-To header, mutt can still make intelligent decisions based on the message subject. I think a good TT system could work in a similar way. Does such a system exist? What other TT systems are worth investigating? It doesn't need to be as heavy as RT, which I think is overkill for our 10 person service organization with roughly 800 users. (Though I think the service organization will be growing, I still think RT is heavier than it needs to be.) Thanks. noah pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
[Help] How to use "iostat" or other command to monitor Software RAID I/O ????
Hello lists : Does anyone knows , How to monitor Software RAID disk I/O i have a Software RAID5 device named "/dev/md0" , i've tried to use "iostat" to monitor /dev/md0 I/O status ... But, it's seems doesn't work !!! === fileserver:/etc/rc.boot# iostat -x /dev/md0 Linux 2.4.20-xfs (fileserver) 07/10/03 avg-cpu: %user %nice%sys %idle 1.18 0.01 1.05 97.76 Device:rrqm/s wrqm/s r/s w/s rsec/s wsec/srkB/swkB/s avgrq-sz avgqu-sz await svctm %util === i've tried to use "mdadm"also, but same as "iostat" result (no more I/O output!!!) Does anyone knows , How to monitor Software RAID disk I/O Thanks. -- Trust & Unique ... axacheng <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Anyone willing to relay for me for a price?
Ah yes, that's right I remember now. This is exactly the kind of situation as to why you shouldn't use CNAME's for MX names or for any official machine name for that matter. CNAME's are just for human convenience, a host should never try to pass itself off by one. Screws up the double reverse lookup. But what ur saying is that there simply is no PTR record for the IP at all. At 01:14 AM 7/09/03 -0400, Jesse Molina wrote: > >If I remember right, you should never make an MX record direct to a >CNAME, for reasons that I can't remember right now. > >All the same, you are right, I could just make my MX be the PTR and most >MTAs would be happy. > >Unfortunately, the record does not exist, so no help there. -- REMEMBER THE WORLD TRADE CENTER ---=< WTC 911 >=-- "...ne cede males" 0100
Re: Anyone willing to relay for me for a price?
Ah yes, that's right I remember now. This is exactly the kind of situation as to why you shouldn't use CNAME's for MX names or for any official machine name for that matter. CNAME's are just for human convenience, a host should never try to pass itself off by one. Screws up the double reverse lookup. But what ur saying is that there simply is no PTR record for the IP at all. At 01:14 AM 7/09/03 -0400, Jesse Molina wrote: > >If I remember right, you should never make an MX record direct to a >CNAME, for reasons that I can't remember right now. > >All the same, you are right, I could just make my MX be the PTR and most >MTAs would be happy. > >Unfortunately, the record does not exist, so no help there. -- REMEMBER THE WORLD TRADE CENTER ---=< WTC 911 >=-- "...ne cede males" 0100 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: semi-remote net
Leonardo Boselli wrote: I posted some weeks ago a question on "satellite network" ... i have not yet tested but i will do in next days, Now I have more information on the services required: not only a "satellite"network, but the expansion plans for our department calla also for a lab in an old building. This building, althought still in the campus is about 600 m far from the next nearest network-wired building. In this bulding will be put three workstations. In this case the problem is not to have them in the same network that of the other ones, being on a different subnet is not a problem, but rather the fact that in that building there are no teleccommunication connections. Getting an optical cable in not an option since within three years that building could be abandoned. I thought about two options: one is a laser connection (but the area is subject to fog) and the other using two wi-fi 2.4 GHz NIC, coupled to two dish antennas . Anyone here has experiences and suggestions on this setup ? -- A couple of things I'd consider: 1) Are there existing conduits, tunnels, or the like running to the building that could be used to run fiber? The fiber itself wouldn't be overly expensive if there was a path to get there. 2) Are there existing copper cables to the building for providing phone service? If so, you may be able to do a home-grown DSL solution on the copper. 3) If all else fails the 2.4 GHz option will probably be the cheapest and easiest option. At 600 m, you might not even need dish antennas. --Rich -- _ Rich Puhek ETN Systems Inc. 2125 1st Ave East Hibbing MN 55746 tel: 218.262.1130 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _
Re: Anyone willing to relay for me for a price?
In Dallas (TX, US), SBC provides DSL with the option of Business Class DSL, providing 5 static IP's. I believe that on the west coast, PacBell provides standard class DSL with one static IP (they did a year ago). Business Class DSL costs $75/mo, while the PacBell thing was around $40/mo if I remember correctly. Again, in Dallas, I could go to another ISP who buys DSL form SBC and resells it. Some, I've heard, would provide me with one static for a very low cost. Check again for DSL providers in your area, especially resellers. Resellers generally buy large blocks of IP's and some of them give you statics as part of the package, others at an additional cost. I hosted a half dozen sites on my DSL line for a few years after it became available, then eventually moved it to a colo. However, my secondary DNS is still sitting on the same DSL. Rod > > Here is some helpful info; > > http://postmaster.info.aol.com/index.html > > http://members.aol.com/adamkb/aol/mailfaq/ > > > > WARNING! Blatant flame ahead! Danger Danger! > > The real problem is that you are a second class Internet citizen because > you don't have a "business class" service, which means a T1, E1, or > greater. > > Angry? Good, you should be. I am. > > > > I have similar problems with mail servers that do reverse DNS SMTP > session checking. Short of paying for a T1 at $800 USD a month, there > is no way that I can get an IP allocation with reverse DNS delegation so > that I can make my mail server's MX record match up with the PTR record. > > I live in a major metropolitan area with over 1.3 million inhabitants > within the United States, and I can't get an ISP to give me an IP > allocation unless I blow major money for "business class" service. As > Jesse Jackson would say, "It's a grrave injustice!" =) > > I am fortunate enough that my ISP's DHCP lease is very stable, the > netblock is not marked as a Dial-up/DSL/Cable net, and they do not > perform any port filtering. Unfortunately, my ISP's staffers are brain > dead and don't even know what reverse DNS delegation is. Hell, even > their own MX record does not match up with their PTR (orlandotelco.net). > They probably suffer from the same problem that I do. How funny and > yet maddening. > > Reverse DNS checking for SMTP sessions is a good idea in theory, but in > practice, it just makes you a Bastard Operator From Hell (BOFH) and gets > you false positives for spam filtering. > > Anyway, pardon my rant. > > > > Chris Evans wrote: >> What a horrible question?! >> >> Situation: I have run a postfix/spamd-SA/RAV/ecartis based Email list >> service (confirmed opt in, never redistributed a spam in some years >> now). It runs off a box at home through British Telecom broadband >> and is low volume (the lists concern psychotherapy and psychotherapy >> research: my day job, and are run for some charities). Since >> 22.vi.03 AOL have started refusing my smtp traffic (with a 4.0.0 >> message so I didn't find out for some days). Netscape are doing >> same. >> >> Turns out when I finally get a British Telecom supervisor on the >> phone to complain that I get no response to my complaints to them by >> Email, that AOL are moderately well justified in doing this because >> it seems that BT ran open relay for some time (he says not since last >> November which sounds untrue but even that seems unbelievably >> stupid). Since mine is a BT IP address I'm blocked and I would be if >> I relayed through BT's server. (Though they'd like to charge me more >> for the priviledge of doing that now they've understood relaying and >> clamped it down -- rightly -- 'cos they do it by domain name as well >> as IP address and ... aargh you get the picture). >> >> So I'm looking for a Debian (since I like Debian!) ISP, ideally in >> the UK, who would be willing for me to relay for psyctc.org, >> atprn.org, atprn.org.uk (all on 217.34.100.194, coming out through >> 198). I've got a shorewall firewall, RAV scanning for virii (but >> probably ditching that something else now they've joined M$!) and >> spamd-SA-razor doing antispam and loads of other antispam from >> postfix. Total traffic is 682k messages out in just under a year >> according to mailgraph, it says max ever was 1012 mssgs/min and mean >> 1.6 msgs/min. Most are very small, basic Email list traffic. My own >> traffic contains occasional large (16Mb record I think) stats and >> presentation files. >> >> Not a lot of money for this as I do it as a gesture for the charities >> but I am willing to pay something if anyone is willing and will quote >> me. I can either relay everything or just aol & netscape for now. I >> will take relaying out if things settle down. >> >> Anyone willing to offer, please contact me off list: >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> TIA, >> >> Chris >> PSYCTC: Psychotherapy, Psychology, Psychiatry, Counselling >>and Therapeutic Communities; practice, research, >>teaching and consultancy. >> Chris Evans & Jo-anne
Re: semi-remote net
Leonardo Boselli wrote: I posted some weeks ago a question on "satellite network" ... i have not yet tested but i will do in next days, Now I have more information on the services required: not only a "satellite"network, but the expansion plans for our department calla also for a lab in an old building. This building, althought still in the campus is about 600 m far from the next nearest network-wired building. In this bulding will be put three workstations. In this case the problem is not to have them in the same network that of the other ones, being on a different subnet is not a problem, but rather the fact that in that building there are no teleccommunication connections. Getting an optical cable in not an option since within three years that building could be abandoned. I thought about two options: one is a laser connection (but the area is subject to fog) and the other using two wi-fi 2.4 GHz NIC, coupled to two dish antennas . Anyone here has experiences and suggestions on this setup ? -- A couple of things I'd consider: 1) Are there existing conduits, tunnels, or the like running to the building that could be used to run fiber? The fiber itself wouldn't be overly expensive if there was a path to get there. 2) Are there existing copper cables to the building for providing phone service? If so, you may be able to do a home-grown DSL solution on the copper. 3) If all else fails the 2.4 GHz option will probably be the cheapest and easiest option. At 600 m, you might not even need dish antennas. --Rich -- _ Rich Puhek ETN Systems Inc. 2125 1st Ave East Hibbing MN 55746 tel: 218.262.1130 email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] _ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Anyone willing to relay for me for a price?
In Dallas (TX, US), SBC provides DSL with the option of Business Class DSL, providing 5 static IP's. I believe that on the west coast, PacBell provides standard class DSL with one static IP (they did a year ago). Business Class DSL costs $75/mo, while the PacBell thing was around $40/mo if I remember correctly. Again, in Dallas, I could go to another ISP who buys DSL form SBC and resells it. Some, I've heard, would provide me with one static for a very low cost. Check again for DSL providers in your area, especially resellers. Resellers generally buy large blocks of IP's and some of them give you statics as part of the package, others at an additional cost. I hosted a half dozen sites on my DSL line for a few years after it became available, then eventually moved it to a colo. However, my secondary DNS is still sitting on the same DSL. Rod > > Here is some helpful info; > > http://postmaster.info.aol.com/index.html > > http://members.aol.com/adamkb/aol/mailfaq/ > > > > WARNING! Blatant flame ahead! Danger Danger! > > The real problem is that you are a second class Internet citizen because > you don't have a "business class" service, which means a T1, E1, or > greater. > > Angry? Good, you should be. I am. > > > > I have similar problems with mail servers that do reverse DNS SMTP > session checking. Short of paying for a T1 at $800 USD a month, there > is no way that I can get an IP allocation with reverse DNS delegation so > that I can make my mail server's MX record match up with the PTR record. > > I live in a major metropolitan area with over 1.3 million inhabitants > within the United States, and I can't get an ISP to give me an IP > allocation unless I blow major money for "business class" service. As > Jesse Jackson would say, "It's a grrave injustice!" =) > > I am fortunate enough that my ISP's DHCP lease is very stable, the > netblock is not marked as a Dial-up/DSL/Cable net, and they do not > perform any port filtering. Unfortunately, my ISP's staffers are brain > dead and don't even know what reverse DNS delegation is. Hell, even > their own MX record does not match up with their PTR (orlandotelco.net). > They probably suffer from the same problem that I do. How funny and > yet maddening. > > Reverse DNS checking for SMTP sessions is a good idea in theory, but in > practice, it just makes you a Bastard Operator From Hell (BOFH) and gets > you false positives for spam filtering. > > Anyway, pardon my rant. > > > > Chris Evans wrote: >> What a horrible question?! >> >> Situation: I have run a postfix/spamd-SA/RAV/ecartis based Email list >> service (confirmed opt in, never redistributed a spam in some years >> now). It runs off a box at home through British Telecom broadband >> and is low volume (the lists concern psychotherapy and psychotherapy >> research: my day job, and are run for some charities). Since >> 22.vi.03 AOL have started refusing my smtp traffic (with a 4.0.0 >> message so I didn't find out for some days). Netscape are doing >> same. >> >> Turns out when I finally get a British Telecom supervisor on the >> phone to complain that I get no response to my complaints to them by >> Email, that AOL are moderately well justified in doing this because >> it seems that BT ran open relay for some time (he says not since last >> November which sounds untrue but even that seems unbelievably >> stupid). Since mine is a BT IP address I'm blocked and I would be if >> I relayed through BT's server. (Though they'd like to charge me more >> for the priviledge of doing that now they've understood relaying and >> clamped it down -- rightly -- 'cos they do it by domain name as well >> as IP address and ... aargh you get the picture). >> >> So I'm looking for a Debian (since I like Debian!) ISP, ideally in >> the UK, who would be willing for me to relay for psyctc.org, >> atprn.org, atprn.org.uk (all on 217.34.100.194, coming out through >> 198). I've got a shorewall firewall, RAV scanning for virii (but >> probably ditching that something else now they've joined M$!) and >> spamd-SA-razor doing antispam and loads of other antispam from >> postfix. Total traffic is 682k messages out in just under a year >> according to mailgraph, it says max ever was 1012 mssgs/min and mean >> 1.6 msgs/min. Most are very small, basic Email list traffic. My own >> traffic contains occasional large (16Mb record I think) stats and >> presentation files. >> >> Not a lot of money for this as I do it as a gesture for the charities >> but I am willing to pay something if anyone is willing and will quote >> me. I can either relay everything or just aol & netscape for now. I >> will take relaying out if things settle down. >> >> Anyone willing to offer, please contact me off list: >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> TIA, >> >> Chris >> PSYCTC: Psychotherapy, Psychology, Psychiatry, Counselling >>and Therapeutic Communities; practice, research, >>teaching and consultancy. >> Chris Evans & Jo-anne
Re: Anyone willing to relay for me for a price?
At 07:35 PM 7/8/2003 -0400, Jesse Molina wrote: The real problem is that you are a second class Internet citizen because you don't have a "business class" service, which means a T1, E1, or greater. Honestly I gave up trying to host my server at home.. Several friends and I went in on a rack at XO's freemont datacenter together, and it comes out to about $50 a month per U for us (that's with maybe 10 machines in the rack) We get full DNS and reverse control, a nice 100m linkup to the datacenter's router (which is really our only bandwidth cap) and our current block gives us a 1mbit monthly bandwidth avarage (which we can upgrade if needbe) Overall, I think it's a pretty good deal as long as you're not wanting physical access to the machine. I personally live in Boston and manage my box in California from here just fine.. So that may be a hosting option for folks who don't want to run a T1 to their garage ;> Just a thought => -Aaron
Re: Anyone willing to relay for me for a price?
At 07:35 PM 7/8/2003 -0400, Jesse Molina wrote: The real problem is that you are a second class Internet citizen because you don't have a "business class" service, which means a T1, E1, or greater. Honestly I gave up trying to host my server at home.. Several friends and I went in on a rack at XO's freemont datacenter together, and it comes out to about $50 a month per U for us (that's with maybe 10 machines in the rack) We get full DNS and reverse control, a nice 100m linkup to the datacenter's router (which is really our only bandwidth cap) and our current block gives us a 1mbit monthly bandwidth avarage (which we can upgrade if needbe) Overall, I think it's a pretty good deal as long as you're not wanting physical access to the machine. I personally live in Boston and manage my box in California from here just fine.. So that may be a hosting option for folks who don't want to run a T1 to their garage ;> Just a thought => -Aaron -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
semi-remote net
I posted some weeks ago a question on "satellite network" ... i have not yet tested but i will do in next days, Now I have more information on the services required: not only a "satellite"network, but the expansion plans for our department calla also for a lab in an old building. This building, althought still in the campus is about 600 m far from the next nearest network-wired building. In this bulding will be put three workstations. In this case the problem is not to have them in the same network that of the other ones, being on a different subnet is not a problem, but rather the fact that in that building there are no teleccommunication connections. Getting an optical cable in not an option since within three years that building could be abandoned. I thought about two options: one is a laser connection (but the area is subject to fog) and the other using two wi-fi 2.4 GHz NIC, coupled to two dish antennas . Anyone here has experiences and suggestions on this setup ? -- Leonardo Boselli Nucleo Informatico e Telematico del Dipartimento Ingegneria Civile Universita` di Firenze , V. S. Marta 3 - I-50139 Firenze tel +39 0554796431 cell +39 3488605348 fax +39 055495333 http://www.dicea.unifi.it/~leo
Re[2]: Anyone willing to relay for me for a price?
On Wednesday, July 9, 2003, 12:35:58 AM Jesse wrote: JM> Here is some helpful info; JM> http://postmaster.info.aol.com/index.html Yes, that is moderately useful, which is more than I can say for the information provided by BT, my ISP. JM> http://members.aol.com/adamkb/aol/mailfaq/ I'll check. JM> WARNING! Blatant flame ahead! Danger Danger! JM> The real problem is that you are a second class Internet citizen because JM> you don't have a "business class" service, which means a T1, E1, or greater. I'm particularly angry as I pay less than $800 per month but way more than I need to so I get "business" broadband ... to no advantage I can see! JM> Angry? Good, you should be. I am. JM> I have similar problems with mail servers that do reverse DNS SMTP JM> session checking. Short of paying for a T1 at $800 USD a month, there JM> is no way that I can get an IP allocation with reverse DNS delegation so JM> that I can make my mail server's MX record match up with the PTR record. Again, I have that problem but I haven't seen many or any bounces that I think are down to that. Another thing I have to get onto the ISP about again. This is mad. I'm all in favour of clamping down on spam but this is cutting the Internet down to a very two class system as you say. Chris PSYCTC: PSYchotherapy,PSYchology,PSychiatry, Counselling and Therapeutic Communities; practice, research, teaching and consultancy. Chris Evans & Jo-anne Carlyle http://psyctc.org/ Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Anyone willing to relay for me for a price?
If I remember right, you should never make an MX record direct to a CNAME, for reasons that I can't remember right now. All the same, you are right, I could just make my MX be the PTR and most MTAs would be happy. Unfortunately, the record does not exist, so no help there. Chris Wagner wrote: But does a PTR record exist? The double reverse lookup should succeed so long as there is a valid A <-> PTR pair. Regardless of whether it was launched into from another A or CNAME or IP. Unless I'm way off base here, it goes presented name -> IP lookup -> PTR lookup -> IP lookup. If the two IP lookups match, the test is passed. At 07:35 PM 7/08/03 -0400, Jesse Molina wrote: I have similar problems with mail servers that do reverse DNS SMTP session checking. Short of paying for a T1 at $800 USD a month, there is no way that I can get an IP allocation with reverse DNS delegation so that I can make my mail server's MX record match up with the PTR record. -- REMEMBER THE WORLD TRADE CENTER ---=< WTC 911 >=-- "...ne cede males" 0100 -- # Jesse Molina # Mail = [EMAIL PROTECTED] # Page = [EMAIL PROTECTED] # Cell = 1.407.970.0280 # Web = http://www.opendreams.net/jesse/
